Sociobiology

Jugaad Ethics

Leon Voss
Full comments are visible to logged-in members only. Sign up or Log in

From this article:

image.png

Cars are an essentially modern mode of transportation. They presume an entire global economy of oil, steel, rubber and who knows what else. Creating and maintaining them requires the specialized labor of engineers, chemists, machinists and managers. If these arrangements break down, cars become useless as such. But a car chassis can still be hitched to a horse, and a horse is a technology with a five thousand year pedigree. Its demands are largely intuitive and readily met. Horse maintenance is democratic that way. The Hindi term for the nature of this horse-drawn car is jugaad, which La Wiki helpfully glosses as “creativity to make existing things work…with meager resources.”

For example, much of contemporary feminism actually reads like an attempt to hook the horse of the patriarchy up to the junker of gender egalitarianism. The patriarchy was bad, as the story goes, so we got rid of it and had the sexual revolution instead. Then the sexual revolution turned out to be a catastrophe of abuse, disgrace, and regret. By the time we realized it, however, “consent” was the only languag…

Replies (7)

Iitisiv
#136

There’s a similar pattern happened with “democracy”. Places like the US and France are still tugged along by pockets of non-democracy that do innovation and organization while the heavy chaos of the masses exploit them. The failures of the orginizing classes (like Afghanistan) become “anti-democratic” projects in which “muh elites” sent our boys to die. Elite successes (the moon landing) “represent America” and not the group that envisioned and executed it.

Leon Vossreply to #136
#137

There’s a similar pattern happened with “democracy”. Places like the US and France are still tugged along by pockets of non-democracy that do innovation and organization while the heavy chaos of the masses exploit them.

Very true. I didn’t think of that. Kind of like what Yarvin said about it back in the day – Apple is so well run and it’s a monarchy, compare that with the government, etc.

The failures of the orginizing classes (like Afghanistan) become “anti-democratic” projects in which “muh elites” sent our boys to die.

Yes, the elite are a scapegoat. Almost every time the rabble blame the elite for something, it’s their own fault. The deep state is really just Obama is really just the majority of Americans. etc

Elite successes (the moon landing) “represent America” and not the group that envisioned and executed it.

Yeah I’ve heard that one recently, the United States is the moon landing or something, when really it was a NSDAP card carrying aristocrat and a bunch of other eugenic 120+ IQ Aryan men, not anyone who has anything in common with 75% of the United States population today. The bottom 70% or 80% would be living in huts if it weren’t for the remainder.

Iitisivreply to #137
#138

Yeah I’ve heard that one recently, the United States is the moon landing or something

The ironic part is that the exact opposite was always true. Most Americans typically will be more concerned with welfare checks than space. If anything, the Moon Landing stands in repudiation of the US. The Moon Landing was Opposed by Majority of US 2.jpg The Moon Landing was Opposed by Majority of US 3.jpg The Moon Landing was Opposed by Majority of US.jpg

Almost every time the rabble blame the elite for something, it’s their own fault.

Yeah, for my example (wars of the middle east) the polls show the same irony as with the moon landing, only reversed. The wars were started with overwhelming support. But when war proves as complicated as it inevitably must become opinion shifts, but at that point you cant exactly claim take backs. The average American thinks they should be able to return whichever war they previously demanded, preferably with full refund, just like they return used items to Walmart. Graphics How do Americans view U.S. wars - CGTN.jpg Polling Wars Hawks vs. Doves  Pew Research Center.jpg

Iitisivreply to #147
#152

I wouldnt call >20% excellent. Thats like calling 5'11 or 6ft an “excellent” height. I mean, 6ft is within the ideal range but not noteworthy. Whats more interesting is people who are top 20% in a variety of traits (say three) or people who are top 1% or even .1% (depending on trait and how meaningful its tails are). IMO if someone is only noteworth in one trait they need to be farther right on its bellcurve then is someone is good at multiple things. top 20% in 3 independent traits is .008%, but since desirable traits tend to correlate we will round up to .1%.

KKtwreply to #137
#145

I increasingly think people are just masochists. Typical prole supports policies harmful to themselves and elites, and so does the typical elite. Whenever one class has a fit of sanity, the other stops it or tries to stop it, such as with wealthy americans moving from reps to dems as reps cut their taxes and dems stoke redistribution demand, such as with american lower classes voting for biden who was not good for them.

Iitisivreply to #145
#151

Stupid people tend to harm themselves and others more often. It may just be people becoming stupider over time. Wealthy american also became less white over time which probably explains some of the movement to dems and also some of the increase in stupidity. Rep vs Dem dichotomy is partially racial tribalism.

Post a Reply

Log in to reply.